Pompo

Marijuana possession should be legalized
1/2/09|The Bristol Press| by The Bristol Press

On Nov. 4, our neighbors to the north voted to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. As of Friday, anyone in Massachusetts caught with an ounce or less would be issued a $100 ticket and would forfeit the pot. Those younger than 18 who are found to have less than an ounce of the drug must also complete a drug-awareness program within one year.

Marijuana is not physically addictive and has been used for centuries without any serious deleterious effect. Overuse can cause problems, like anything else but, used responsibly, marijuana is benign, even more so than alcohol.

Thus, possessing small amounts of marijuana should not be a crime in and of itself. More and more states are decriminalizing marijuana for medical and personal use and Connecticut should do the same.

The Massachusetts law makes a distinction between those who sell weed, and those who use it for medical or even personal use — and here’s the problem: The new law is imperfect, raising all kinds of questions about how users obtain the still-illegal substance.

As Californians can testify, getting the stuff, even for legal medical use, is risky, thanks to a federal government that stands four-square against legalization and occasionally demonstrates this by prosecuting suppliers, whatever the state statute.

Selling weed for profit is treated as a criminal act — indeed, many times pot sellers are prosecuted under interstate commerce regulations as well as anti-drug laws. But, should it be legalized, marijuana could be monitored, regulated for purity and taxed, like alcohol, as a further form of income for the state.

The Massachusetts law makes no provision for this. The law is simply intended to take the stigma off those who use small amounts of marijuana and not cause them problems with school or future employment.

What does keeping marijuana illegal get — to the north or here at home? Prisons crowded with non-violent stoners, room and board paid for by taxpayers.

Decriminalization would be a cost-savings as well as a revenue generator.

marcusJay

It appears to be an editorial in the Bristol Press.